Oliver Stone and his producing partner Moritz Borman have thrown their hats in the ring and will make a movie about Edward Snowden, the former systems administrator for the CIA and a counterintelligence trainer at the Defense Intelligence Agency who later worked for the National Security Agency and then made public thousands of classified documents, an act which has been called the most significant leak in U.S. history since the release of the Pentagon Papers by Daniel Ellsberg.

Stone and Borman bought screen rights to The Snowden Files: The Inside Story Of The World’s Most Wanted Man, a book by Guardian journalist Luke Harding that’s published by Guardian Faber. Stone will write and direct the film based on Harding’s Pulitzer Prize-winning reporting of the disclosures provided by Snowden. It’ll be mounted as a European co-production.

I got a no comment from insiders when I asked if Snowden’s rights are part of the package. He’s currently residing in Russia, after fleeing the U.S. and trying unsuccessfully to find a place to live in other countries. Harding and other Guardian journalists will also act as exclusive production and story consultants. This is the first project Stone has sparked to since he exited plans to make a movie on the life of Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.

“This is one of the greatest stories of our time,” Stone said in a statement. “A real challenge. I’m glad to have the Guardian working with us.”

Guardian editor-in-chief Alan Rusbridger said: “The story of Edward Snowden is truly extraordinary, and the unprecedented revelations he brought to light have forever transformed our understanding of, and relationship with, government and technology. We’re delighted to be working with Oliver Stone and Moritz Borman on the film.”

This will follow in a line of movies about whistleblowers that range from Silkwood to On The Waterfront, All The President’s Men, Serpico, Erin Brockovich, The Insider, Michael Clayton and more recently The Whistleblower and The Fifth Estate. In this case, a Snowden movie will face the same questions as when there was a stampede to make movies about Julian Assange after he dumped reams of classified documents through WikiLeaks. DreamWorks and Bill Condon won that race with the Benedict Cumberbatch/Daniel Bruhl-starrer Fifth Estate, and the result was a flop. I think it had a lot to do with the fact that Assange was impossible to root for.

I mentioned Ellsberg up top, and after watching the superb documentary The Most Dangerous Man In America by Judith Ehrlich and Rick Goldsmith on Ellberg’s actions during the escalating Vietnam War, I am surprised nobody has made a major studio movie on his life. There is a similar kind of drama getting the Pentagon Papers published as there was when inter-media cooperation made it impossible for a confidentiality clause with Brown & Williamson to snuff out the testimony about the addictive nature of tobacco by scientist Jeffrey Wigand on 60 Minutes, which was key to the plot of the Michael Mann-directed The Insider. I recall in the docu that once he was exposed as the leaker, Ellsberg admitted to it and was asked point blank how he felt about the possibility of going to jail for leaking top-secret documents showing the White House and military had been deceiving the public on its reports about troop commitments, the resolve of the Vietcong and the progress of the Vietnam War. Ellsburg said that if this was the price of stopping an unjust war, he would gladly pay it.

Viewed through the prism of history, Ellsberg, like Wigand, clearly qualifies as a protagonist if a movie was made about him, a guy who stood up for what he believed was right, who was willing to stay and accept the consequences. In the case of Assange, whatever noble context he might have had evaporated because of his hubris, the sexual allegations waged against him, and his inability to protect the sources of his documents. Nobody came to see the DreamWorks movie. Even in the skilled hands of Stone, how does one cast Snowden, who seems equally cagey in interviews that are taking place in Russia, where he is currently ensconced?

32 Comments

Oliver, the public in general simply does not care that its right to privacy has evaporated and even less about Snowden.

Snowden White • on Jun 2, 2014 10:04 am

…dare I agree? I think the public actually cares even less about Oliver Stone considering his abysmal cinematic track record over the last decade or so….

nah • on Jun 2, 2014 10:04 am

Eh….I don’t see Snowdon as any more likable than Assange. In Snowdon’s case, he comes off as a naive moron. Didn’t he anticipate that he would have to flee the country and the only places offering asylum would be unlovely regimes like Russia? If he’s that big of a dolt, what business does he have blowing the whistle on anything? Why should I trust someone that dumb?

Nah, if he’d stayed in America and made himself a big martyr by fighting a highly publicized court case, THEN I could see a Serpico type movie about him. Because then everyone would see he has big balls.

David • on Jun 2, 2014 10:04 am

“if he’d stayed in America and made himself a big martyr by fighting a highly publicized court case, THEN I could see a Serpico type movie about him. Because then everyone would see he has big balls.”

This movie will have to be incredible to get any kind of audience interest in Snowden. NBC pushed their interview huge last week and only got a 1.3 18-49.

Hollywoodland • on Jun 2, 2014 10:04 am

I’m just glad he’s no longer associated with the MLK movie. The idea of Oliver Stone getting anywhere near Dr. King’s story was nauseating. I’ve enjoyed some of Stone’s movies but he’s not nearly as smart or deep as he thinks he is and his motives and cinematic interpretations always seem self-interested more than anything else to me. He’s got an agenda and everything else be damned.

David • on Jun 2, 2014 10:04 am

Yes, but the majority of people are misinformed, self-centered and indifferent and when it comes to current events they care only for the NBA Finals and the Affordable Care Act (“Obama Care”). Give them a movie about comic book “heroes” and any Seth Rogen comedy and they are satisfied.

Bounder • on Jun 2, 2014 10:04 am

I’ll bet HBO could get a solid movie out of this…if Danny Strong wrote it.

It seems like Oliver Stone’s project will be a major challenge to Glenn Greenwald’s similar film project with Sony, which can only mean that sometime in the near future Greenwald will take to Twitter to denounce Stone as ‘pernicious.’

kpkwrtr • on Jun 2, 2014 10:04 am

I guess it doesn’t qualify as a “major” studio, but HBO did a film about Ellsberg called “The Pentagon Papers” with James Spader in the lead.

KEEP DREAMING • on Jun 2, 2014 10:04 am

It aired on FX Network in association with Paramount Television and City Entertainment. HBO had nothing to do with it. Get your facts straight.

vintage • on Jun 2, 2014 10:04 am

olivers work is so understated and fair and balanced…i know we will get at the truth..olivers truth

USA • on Jun 2, 2014 10:04 am

If Oliver makes it, no one will go; I for one wouldn’t spend time nor money to see it.

Andrew • on Jun 2, 2014 10:04 am

Cast Paul Dano as Snowden.

Of course, you’ll have to put in a flash back scene wherein a teenage Snowden gets beaten up by the high school bully (played by Hugh Jackman, Daniel Day Lewis or Chewetel).

But, it’s basically a Paul Dano role.

True Story • on Jun 2, 2014 10:04 am

Matthew Modine…or Topher Grace.

Hardy • on Jun 2, 2014 10:04 am

Nobody cares about this guy and his stupid information leaking. Didn’t we learn this with the 5TH ESTATE? And in the hands of Oliver Stone…oh boy, the last good film he made was 20 years ago. Mess-in-the-making.

David • on Jun 2, 2014 10:04 am

Shut up troll.

jepressman • on Jun 2, 2014 10:04 am

This project is not necessary!

David • on Jun 2, 2014 10:04 am

Your ignorant comment is not necessary.

JB • on Jun 2, 2014 10:04 am

Are you kidding me? The spy thriller of the century. And check the barely-hidding subtext of CAPTAIN AMERICA, WINTER SOLDIER for the super-Snowden storyline. The Cap plays for team Snowden, long story short. That was a blockbuster, last I checked.

"Mac" Walling • on Jun 2, 2014 10:04 am

He’s like a Russian ballet dancer defecting but in reverse. He’s even built a little bit like a ballet dancer.

Michael Hayden himself still stands by the term “defector”. His criticism of Snowden yesterday (on “Face the Nation”) was predicated on specific acts of taking documentation as compared to the thirty months that a C.I.A. employee got regarding ONE conversation he had with a reporter. This would be a complementary “one” similar to the one E-mail that they revealed that was written by Snowden in a theoretical “paper trail” to higher-ups. The N.S.A. and the C.I.A. are organizations that do not denote anything directly neither having the responsibility to confirm nor deny anything also.

Sweet! How many people have that deal?

Who exactly would go into this line of work?

If those are the terms isn’t it possible that bitter opportunism or a separate agenda from the very beginning – where means and ends are purposely obfuscated or transposed at least – are conceivably natural end results? You obviously can never leave it. It’s not the military, but they demand military fealty rooted in the psychological designed to intimidate if not harass by definition of what they’re doing in the first place, and yet you can leave the military with more ease.

If the absence of evidence is the objective always, and you get involved with these people, and you wish to whistle blow as well as conscientiously object which is why you wish to whistle blow in the first place, by definition of their activities and pursuits – no fingerprints – VOLUMINOUS DOCUMENTATION would be the natural consequence counterbalance to the complete premeditation of the CONSTRUCTION of the absence of evidence as “necessary evil” an exigency created by the principles and activities of the originating organization to begin with.

No fingerprints = imprecise and therefore unbelievably protracted in order to keep some secret Big Picture under wraps.

No beginning. No end. Similar in a way to how organized crime often turns up in state and local construction and road projects. Cash cow. It’s never really finished. No beginning really. No end really. (Also the characteristics of blackmail and extortion.)

Constant work in progress.

Therefore the graft is harder to detect.

Which can consistently be royally conferred civic-minded altruistic attributes.

Like a bridge.

The crime becomes the complementary to the ongoing.

The volume of the materials he took was to illustrate a systemic Big Picture that obviously troubled him.

And the necessity of the volume illustrated the systemics of the toxicity of “no fingerprints” when morality and ethics are being arrogantly transgressed without apology, and potential if not probable abuses and possibly criminal activities are conceivably taking place as well, an amplification system for rogues and gangs within the government basically the terms of “employment” as such for the implicit inspired and the like-minded.

The rhetoric from the beginning has been “traitor”. Black and white. Dumb and naive. Comprehensively the inter-net and social media relentlessly churn grey. The immediate reaction to a claim of “black” or “white.”

Hence Benghazi.

Hayden wanted to make the case that Snowden is complicit with “K.G.B.” oversight in spite of Snowden’s protestations to the contrary which, one supposes, is one definition of intelligence gathering.

The “K.G.B.” is doing what we wanted Snowden to do. Indirectly this was the point that he intended as “take-away” reinforcing that according to him – we just have to accept it on face value; “hey it’s me yours truly Michael Hayden – I would never “wittingly” do any harm to any American citizen.”

Silence is the job. Meaning “no fingerprints”.

But with the N.S.A. wanting the best computer hackers – to have the ability to eavesdrop with terrorism a subject wide open to interpretation as both impetus and rationalization that could create a whole host of troubling domestic social issues – the head and the tail of the serpent are one and the same – Snowden’s point and the N.S.A.’s dilemma – patriotism at legally deniable “gunpoint” the end result without the documentation of a SYSTEMIC equation in order to illustrate larger issues that are poised AT THIS TRANSITIONAL MOMENT IN AMERICAN HISTORY to become PERMANENT conditions of American society per an increasingly faceless government that is most definitely not elected to enjoy these powers by anybody.

A hard line on Snowden is certainly not going to pick up the recruiting process by the way. Technically a computer hacker is being hired to be a criminal perhaps if not probably. Eventually they will figure out that that fact can potentially be turned on them no problem.

The N.S.A. might claim that this would never ever happen. Who would believe them? THEY HIRE COMPUTER HACKERS! You have the ability to go through women’s “purses” just for kicks and call it “intelligence gathering”.

Mr. Majestyk • on Jun 2, 2014 10:04 am

I wish I could say “TL;DR”, but unfortunately I read the whole comment. I’m still left wondering what the main point is.

SaMoGuy@aol.com • on Jun 2, 2014 10:04 am

This article wins the STUPID HEADLINE of the week award.

Oliver Stone to make a movie about Snowden and we have to ask: HERO OR VILLAIN?

Hmm, let me think.

David • on Jun 2, 2014 10:04 am

I concur. Although some idiots on this comment section disagree.

Mr. Majestyk • on Jun 2, 2014 10:04 am

The answer might be a little of both. That’s why Snowden would be an interesting figure for a movie.

fluffo • on Jun 2, 2014 10:04 am

Most people recognize these “whistleblowers” as what they are: opportunists at best, traitors at worst. They are not movie heroes. I guess the Chelsea Manning story would be the trifecta.

David • on Jun 2, 2014 10:04 am

“Most people recognize these “whistleblowers” as what they are: opportunists at best, traitors at worst.”

How ironic.

Jack • on Jun 2, 2014 10:04 am

You got a lotta problems, don’t ya?

"Mac" • on Jun 2, 2014 10:04 am

Whistleblowers are “opportunists at best”? About what? People’s lives like what’s been going on at G.M.? What happened with Big Tobacco? Thus far what’s the “irreparable harm” that Snowden has done to this country? That the C.I.A. and the N.S.A can’t do what they want to do whenever they feel like it to Americans by exploiting planted loop holes in some comprehensive Patriot Act disclaimer which is in fact an entire congressional legal disclaimer act in and of itself? You hesitate to say something like this out of a fear that the C.I.A. and the N.S.A. would then collaborate on some terrorist event to hammer home the notion that Snowden has done the “irreparable harm” that they contend has already be done. Further to the point to my knowledge the N.S.A. has yet to show Edward Snowden-signed documentation that he betrayed.

Chelsea Manning was in the military. Different set of issues that were a lot more concrete. Certainly all of this is going to come into play with Bowe the Norwegian “hero” traded for five terrorists – all of whom were probably tortured at Gitmo and I would imagine would be of the mindset to be seeking vengeance right out of a Charles Bronson movie – like baseball cards. The whole thing including Susan Rice’s participation feels like a mirage-like set-up – Benghazi again – meant to distract out of timed political desperation. Given the facts as they are right now – the facts – preexisting “enhanced interrogation”, in the past, and perhaps presently – Obama never closed them like he promised he would – in pointedly named “black sites” – what just happened seems to me to be utter madness! This is not the way to go about closing them! Throwing fish back into the enemy combatant ocean a little bit at a time! Until what? They’re all swimming freely again with their little fishy friends?

No one ever said the exact terms of the Patriot Act were supposed to be permanent. Congress talks about “fixes” constantly but these days never seem to get around to them much.

William H. • on Jun 2, 2014 10:04 am

Snowden told the American public what it needed to know.
I hope the movie does that justice and is a big success.

Anon • on Jun 2, 2014 10:04 am

Does anyone else get so tired of films being made out of current events that aren’t even close to resolving their present state of affairs?